MyDD :: Clinton crushing Obama in Kentucky by 29 points!

Clinton crushing Obama in Kentucky by 29 points!

by labanman, Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:20:20 PM EST

A new SurveyUSA poll released today for Kentucky shows Sen. Hillary Clinton crushing Sen. Barack Obama, 58% to 29%, in the closed Democratic primary to be held on May 20.

Key findings: Clinton leads in all parts of the state including 4 to 1 in Eastern KY. She is beating Obama by 20 points among men, and is leading Obama by 37 points among women.

SurveyUSA poll in Kentucky shows Sen. Hillary Clinton crushing Sen. Barack Obama, 58% to 29%, in the closed Democratic primary to be held on May 20.

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollRepo rtPopup.aspx?g=93b1b163-e67d-4e0b-b06f-1 74b4c7542b5&q=45558

Tags: Clinton wins, Obama, crushing (all tags)

Permalink :: 76 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: Clinton crushing Obama in Kentucky by 29 point (none / 0)

It won't matter. As he time to campaign there.

McCain: The Past, Obama: The Future

by KathyM on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:22:10 PM EST

Re: Clinton crushing Obama in Kentucky by 29 point (2.00 / 2)

i don't think that will matter. "Real" people are not screaming "yes we can"

by American1989 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:35:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton crushing Obama in Kentucky by 29 point (none / 0)

Not everybody supporting Obama is screaming "yes we can".

And if the people screaming "yes we can" aren't "real people" what are they?

Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.

by Carl Nyberg on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:04:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton crushing Obama in Kentucky by 29 point (none / 0)

Do you expect the lead to hold?

How many delegates will this translate into?

Why should Clinton's dominating performance in the Bluegrass State persuade superdelegates to support her over Obama? Didn't HRC argue that small Red states don't mean much? Or is that only true when Obama wins them?

Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.

by Carl Nyberg on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:24:08 PM EST

Re: Clinton crushing Obama in Kentucky by 29 point (2.00 / 3)

Actually bill clinton won kentucky twice.

It is more of a purple state .

The right democratic can win it.

Yes , i expect the lead to hold , Obama is not a good fit for Appalachia

Kentucky , WV are not good states for him.

When I speak I have a southern drawl.. When you come down here Stop and say hello I'm an American from south of the Mason Dixon line

by lori on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:29:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton crushing Obama in Kentucky by 29 point (none / 0)

I expect Obama will be able to narrow the gap significantly (to single digits), if he uses the right strategy. Focus on issues like coal, visit the rural areas, etc. JFK managed to do it, after all.

John McCain

by MILiberal on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:57:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton crushing Obama in Kentucky by 29 point (none / 0)

Why is Obama not a good fit for Appalachia? Why is Sen. Clinton a better fit?

Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.

by Carl Nyberg on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:02:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

if Gore didn't win Kentucky in 2000 (none / 0)

why do you think HRC has a chance in 2008?

Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.

by Carl Nyberg on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:05:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: if Gore didn't win Kentucky in 2000 (2.00 / 1)

I didn't say she would win it.

Did I miss something ?

She would make Kentucky , Tennessee , Oklahoma a little competitive but I don't think she would win ultimately.

A lot of seniors , blue collar voters and reagan democrats in these states . They are receptive to her message which is policy driven and Bill is popular there.

And women in these states see her as a hero . A lot of working class females who identify with her as a fighter .

At least thats how she is seen here in Tennessee among women. Her gender is a huge advantage for her.

When I speak I have a southern drawl.. When you come down here Stop and say hello I'm an American from south of the Mason Dixon line

by lori on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:13:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: if Gore didn't win Kentucky in 2000 (none / 0)

Doesn't Obama make far more states competitive than HRC?

Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.

by Carl Nyberg on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:22:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Based on these polls, I think not. (2.00 / 1)

I think Obama does not turn the South blue.

by TomP on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:27:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Based on these polls, I think not. (none / 0)

You avoided answering the question I asked in favor of a statement that is bordering on a non-sequitor.

Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.

by Carl Nyberg on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:31:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What are you talking about? (none / 0)

You make no sense, Carl.

I responded to your comment about Kentucky. There was no question directed to me that I avoided.

I note your use of the term "non-sequitor." Gosh, should that intimidate me? Sorry, but it does not. Got a J.D., and argue for a living.

By the way, I favor neither Obama nor Clinton.
But I do see reality and Obama is toast in Kentucky and much of the South.

Silly stuff, Carl.

by TomP on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 06:03:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Sen. Clinton has stiffed her vendors (none / 0)

Caterers, union workers who set up the podium, ordinary working folks all are getting stiffed by Sen. Clinton. Would she still be a hero to them if they knew about it?

Shame on you Hillary Clinton!

by LibDem on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:47:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton crushing Obama in Kentucky by 29 point (none / 0)

If that were the final result (and every state has closed the more Obama has campaigned there) the 51 elected delegates from Kentucky would be split 34-17, gaining Hillary 17 delegates.

She currently trails by 167.

So that would get her to 150, if everything is split evenly between now and then.

Good for her. But it doesn't change the fact that Obama has an insurmountable lead in elected delegates.

by bawbie on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:26:32 PM EST

Re: Clinton crushing Obama in Kentucky by 29 point (none / 0)

Should an inevitable candidate ever lose by 30%? That seems to be the problem with this continued line or debate. If Obama is the inevitable nominee then all of these votes amount to protest votes; is that really a good sign for November?

Voices in the Wilderness

by Wiseprince on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:58:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton crushing Obama in Kentucky by 29 point (none / 0)

I didn't say it was a good thing. But the math is what it is.

I don't think Obama will lose KY by 30. But he probably will by 20.

The truth of the matter is that this primary has been very divided along regional lines, and the Appalachia region is by far Obama's worst.

by bawbie on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:06:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

So? (none / 0)

wow a redneck state like Kentucky not voting for a black guy?

/suprising

My dream is Hillary will sponser a joint resolution to authorize the use of the United States Armed Forces against Trinity Church

by denounceandreject on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:27:35 PM EST

Re: So? (2.00 / 1)

ehm.

He won Utah and Wyoming , didn't he ?

When I speak I have a southern drawl.. When you come down here Stop and say hello I'm an American from south of the Mason Dixon line

by lori on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:31:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So? (none / 0)

Ok I have been to all three states and to compare Utah and Wyoming to Kentucky is a long stretch. First their isn't a influential black population or history in Utah and Wyoming like Kentucky and having traveled their many times it is pretty much a very conservative state which has a distaste for colored folks.

/of course not ALL people are like that

My dream is Hillary will sponser a joint resolution to authorize the use of the United States Armed Forces against Trinity Church

by denounceandreject on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:38:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So? (none / 0)

We are talking about democratic primaries, not disenfranchising caucuses!!

by alvic63 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:52:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So? (none / 0)

Utah isn't actually really redneck at all (I live there). The progressives among us are more Seattle type people.

Wyoming, I don't know about so much.

If you are not voting Obama, please let me know so I can replace your sorry ass with another new voter.

by Darknesse on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:53:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So? (none / 0)

I suppose I can make the argument that the democrats/progressives in Kentucky are not rednecks as well.

I just find it ridicolous to want to tar voters in Kentucky as racist because Obama is not gaining traction.

When I speak I have a southern drawl.. When you come down here Stop and say hello I'm an American from south of the Mason Dixon line

by lori on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:57:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So? (none / 0)

And Idaho, home of white supremicists.

by Sensible on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:16:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So? (2.00 / 1)

Wow. A supporter of Mr Unity himself writing off a entire state as "Rednecks." And after THE SPEECH even!!!!

by Mayor McCheese on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:42:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So? (none / 0)

No, you are right; Kentucky is a bastion of liberal philosophy and thinking. It is the Mecca of progressive issues where we all can gather.

My dream is Hillary will sponser a joint resolution to authorize the use of the United States Armed Forces against Trinity Church

by denounceandreject on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 06:13:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton crushing Obama in Kentucky by 29 point (2.00 / 1)

Kentucky has 34 delegate...WV 18... if she wins 2-1. That is 66-33, which is highly unlikely, she gets all of 35-17 delegates.

Or 19 delegates in Obama's 150 delegate lead.

If you add the remote chance she picks up 25 delegates in PA, based on recent polling, she cuts his lead to 105.

That would mean somehow in Oregon, Montana, NC, and Indiana, and PR she would need to also pull off 2-1 victories.

Bring Back MyDD - Just say No to Rec'ing Candidate Diaries.

by CardBoard on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:29:57 PM EST

Re: Clinton crushing Obama in Kentucky by 29 point (none / 0)

great...ANOTHER math lesson!

allprogressives.com

by Scan on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:52:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Looks like someone's digging new goalpost holes! (none / 0)

by Addison on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:31:21 PM EST

Re: Looks like someone's digging new goalpost hole (none / 0)

The goalpost argument from the Obama camp is getting tiresome. The goalpost are and have always been 2024 delegates (more than 2200 if MI and FL re-vote). If anyone is moving goal posts it is Obama supporters and the media types who have been urging HRC to quit. That is what I call moving the goalposts.

by bluestatedude on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 09:33:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It's not an "argument..." (none / 0)

by Addison on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 10:07:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton crushing Obama in Kentucky by 29 point (none / 0)

nice. but, i want to see IN, PA and NC from SUSA. We know that WV, KY are for Hill and OR, MT, SD are for Obama

by American1989 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:33:04 PM EST

1980 and Kennedy (2.00 / 1)

Should Hillary quit? Hell, no says Steve Kornacki of the NY Observer:

It was no different in 1980, when Ted Kennedy was walloped by Jimmy Carter in most primaries. But Kennedy won just enough big states to maintain a sense of viability. At this point in the '80 race, Kennedy was nearly 1,000 delegates behind Carter. He, too, argued that a strong finish to the primary season would send uncommitted delegates, and those previously committed to Carter, stampeding his way. And like Hart, he faced no concerted effort to push him out of the race before the last primary in June.

http://www.observer.com/2008/why-hillary -carries

by katmandu1 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:36:49 PM EST

Re: 1980 and Kennedy (none / 0)

Yeah, and we know how that turned out.

A lot of folks argue that this really, really hurt Carter.

We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.

by politicsmatters on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:40:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

As the Washingon Post said (2.00 / 1)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con tent/article/2008/03/29/AR2008032901846. html

But their extended contest informs the electorate and serves to battle-test them both. We don't see why the process should be short-circuited when millions of votes are yet to be cast and two qualified candidates believe themselves to be the best potential Democratic nominee.

People who want her to leave should remember this:

No doubt the Democrats have gotten themselves into a fix with rules that may leave the final decision to unelected superdelegates -- but why is the answer to that less democracy? Why not give as many voters as possible a chance?

by katmandu1 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:45:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 1980 and Kennedy (none / 0)

oh hell no, she should stay as long as she wants. Obama needs the extra batting practice when he faces the Republicans.

I can't wait for the debates between McCain and Obama. I just hope he goes easy on the poor geezer.

My dream is Hillary will sponser a joint resolution to authorize the use of the United States Armed Forces against Trinity Church

by denounceandreject on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:40:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 1980 and Kennedy (none / 0)

So you hope Granpa McGrumpy will go easy on Obama? I wouldn't hold my breath for that to happen...

Grumpy, reluctant, sore-losing, unhappy, irritable Hillary supporter for Barack Obama 2008

by DemAC on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:52:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I was wondering about that... (none / 0)

Wouldn't an extended "scrimmage" help whichever candidate ends up as the nominee? The caveat, of course, is that both candidates need to campaign as if they are running against McCain.

by KTinOhio on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:52:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 1980 and Kennedy (none / 0)

I read an article but lost the link that said that there have 3 hotly contested conventions, two Democratic and one Republican. In all 3 cases the eventual nominee of the "contested" convention went on to lose.

As intuitive as the case for an extended nomination battle sounds, I'd rather stick to the historical numbers.

by desertjedi on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:07:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Chances the Race Gets to Kentucky? (2.00 / 1)

1-4, is my guess, CW is saying she needs to sweep Indiana, NC, PA

Bring Back MyDD - Just say No to Rec'ing Candidate Diaries.

by CardBoard on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:38:45 PM EST

Re: Chances the Race Gets to Kentucky? (none / 0)

Rumor is two senior advisors have reported if she doesn't win Indiana they will ask her to resign.

My dream is Hillary will sponser a joint resolution to authorize the use of the United States Armed Forces against Trinity Church

by denounceandreject on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:40:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Chances the Race Gets to Kentucky? (none / 0)

Rumor from where?

by americanincanada on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:00:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Chances the Race Gets to Kentucky? (none / 0)

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/29/us/pol itics/29dems.html?_r=1&hp=&adxnn l=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=12069976 05-ozm+KqVay+dkDPldRIggBg

My dream is Hillary will sponser a joint resolution to authorize the use of the United States Armed Forces against Trinity Church

by denounceandreject on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:07:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Chances the Race Gets to Kentucky? (none / 0)

Polls are showing that Obama are winning has a substantial lead in North Carolina so I doubt that she will be winning all 3 of those states.

by puma on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:43:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Chances the Race Gets to Kentucky? (none / 0)

They are going to try to move that goal-post...but too many supers are waiting for the NC results to break for Obama. I have heard of no supers waiting to break for Hillary.

Bring Back MyDD - Just say No to Rec'ing Candidate Diaries.

by CardBoard on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:45:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Chances the Race Gets to Kentucky? (2.00 / 1)

How did convention wisdom work out for you in NH and TX/OH

When I speak I have a southern drawl.. When you come down here Stop and say hello I'm an American from south of the Mason Dixon line

by lori on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:51:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Chances the Race Gets to Kentucky? (none / 0)

Well, Obama did win Texas...

by KTinOhio on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:53:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Chances the Race Gets to Kentucky? (none / 0)

Since when is losing the popular vote called winning? If you think because Obama won the caucus and hence 3 more delegates then you should be praising the Supreme Court for making Bush our President.

Restore America's Strength.

by RJEvans on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:21:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Chances the Race Gets to Kentucky? (none / 0)

When the rules count delegates won, not popular vote.

The DNC rules state that individual states send delegates to the national convention. They don't say anything about popular votes.

by bawbie on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:30:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Chances the Race Gets to Kentucky? (none / 0)

CW said Hillary had to win NH, OH, and Texas...and she did (sort of in Texas)

CW says she has to win PA, NC, IN... can she? doubtful

Bring Back MyDD - Just say No to Rec'ing Candidate Diaries.

by CardBoard on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:00:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Chances the Race Gets to Kentucky? (none / 0)

CW said she was going to lose NH in a landslide , I don't have to remind you of that .

You would think folks have learnt their lessons not to rely on CW.

When I speak I have a southern drawl.. When you come down here Stop and say hello I'm an American from south of the Mason Dixon line

by lori on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:04:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Chances the Race Gets to Kentucky? (2.00 / 1)

But didn't the CW say at one point that Clinton was going to sweep the primaries and her only problem was going to be a potential Edwards upset in Iowa?

I think the thing to learn from this election is that conventional wisdom is anything but wise.

John McCain wants to stay in Iraq for a century.

by jkfp2004 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:06:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Why This Race Will Never See Kentucky (none / 0)

Also Out "The latest Public Policy Polling survey in North Carolina finds Sen. Barack Obama leading Sen. Hillary Clinton, 54% to 36%.

Obama's greatest strength "is coming from voters who have a history of voting in general elections but not in primaries. With that group he has a 60% to 32% advantage. Bringing more folks into the political process has been one of the central successes of the Obama campaign, and it appears he's doing that in North Carolina."

Bring Back MyDD - Just say No to Rec'ing Candidate Diaries.

by CardBoard on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:50:54 PM EST

Looking at the demographics this is obvious (2.00 / 1)

I mean no offense but the only place the demographics broke down in this campagin were during the potomac primary and in Wisconsin, otherwise one could predict the winner of the state before hand if one knew which groups supported a candidate, like Mississippi going for Obama or Ohio going for Clinton. The only break downs in the demographics were in Obama's favor when he was on his streak.

Demographics are why:
Clinton will win PA by at least 10%
Obama will win NC by at least 9%
Clinton will win IN by around 3%
Obama will win OR by 10%
Clinton will win KY by 20%
Clinton will win WV by 20%
Obama will win SD by 8%
Obama will win MT by 10%

Student Guy=JoeMentum. No really Student Guy=JoeMentum, after all JoeMentum was an embarrassment so is Student Guy. This sig is FAIL!!

by Student Guy on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:52:38 PM EST

Re: Looking at the demographics this is obvious (2.00 / 1)

I don't agree with you on Indiana. I think that Obama has a good chance of winning there because of the proximity of Illinois.

by Spanky on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:56:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Looking at the demographics this is obvious (none / 0)

The proximity of IL keeps it close and maybe gets it barely into Obama's category. I mean most of the state is industrial while Sen. Clinton does real well in. Sen Obama has Indianapolis which isn't Minneaoplis or Seattle (probably a 1o-20% win for Obama) and the NW corner (5% for Obama ) and the rest of the state is favorable for Sen. Clinton

Student Guy=JoeMentum. No really Student Guy=JoeMentum, after all JoeMentum was an embarrassment so is Student Guy. This sig is FAIL!!

by Student Guy on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 08:17:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Looking at the demographics this is obvious (2.00 / 1)

Has any one seen any recent numbers out of IN? I know there are tons of polls from NC, but I haven't heard anything out of the Hoosier state for a while.

John McCain wants to stay in Iraq for a century.

by jkfp2004 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:00:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Closed democratic primary - Kentucky (none / 0)

All of the races should've been closed democratic primaries! If that were the case, we'd have our nominee already!

by Abe on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:53:18 PM EST

The thinking behind an open primary (none / 0)

is that Democrats can't win without Independents so they better have a say who our nominee is. That's why the decision is left up to the state and the state part. In some states, Democrats MUST have substantial independent support to just be competitive whereas in others churning out the Democratic base is all you need.

John McCain wants to stay in Iraq for a century.

by jkfp2004 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:58:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Democratic party (none / 0)

The democratic party runs democrats, nominates democrats...by definition - it is democrats! Just sayin'!

(Your topic, elections, is a different subject.)

by Abe on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:20:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Democratic party (none / 0)

However, and unfortunately, Democrats can't do a thing electorally (or in government for that matter) without the help of independents. Chalk it up to Rush and years of right wing smears that made people ashamed to say they were liberals and become indies.

John McCain wants to stay in Iraq for a century.

by jkfp2004 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:39:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Closed democratic primary - Kentucky (none / 0)

Why are HRC supporters so frequently arguing for retroactive rule changes?

Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.

by Carl Nyberg on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:27:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton crushing Obama in Kentucky by (none / 0)

Maybe Kentucky is mad at Obama because he hasn't campaigned there much. I think once Obama goes there his poll standing will improve. Kentucky voters want to feel the Obama love too.

by Spanky on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:54:16 PM EST

Anti-Obama stories slowly leaking out to MSM (none / 0)

Lots of time, my friend. People like Jake Tapper asking:

Who's Scrubbing the Trinity Church Website? http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/ He also doesn't think much of Obama's "Professor" argument. http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/ 2008/03/legal-eagles.html

And should we really vote for a commander in chief, the leader of the free world, who goes bowling to show he's a regular guy, and bowls a 37? http://wonkette.com/374041/barack-obama- fails-at-bowling-in-pennsylvania

My three year old got higher than a 37 and we set the ball down on the floor and she pushes it. (My wife pointed this out.) Here's the video of Obama playing gutter politics. http://youtube.com/watch?v=-afpPb2NT2I

by katmandu1 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:57:38 PM EST

Re: Anti-Obama stories slowly leaking out to MSM (none / 0)

Well we did elect a president who can throw a pretty good first pitch at a baseball game and look how far that got us...

Seriously, W's got a good arm.

John McCain wants to stay in Iraq for a century.

by jkfp2004 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:04:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Anti-Obama stories slowly leaking out to MSM (none / 0)

Wow we are basing who we pick for president on how he bowls?

Also the school itself claim he was a professor when he was working there, but we need to question that because of Jake freakin Tapper?

/you need to learn to pick your battles

My dream is Hillary will sponser a joint resolution to authorize the use of the United States Armed Forces against Trinity Church

by denounceandreject on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:04:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Anti-Obama stories slowly leaking out to MSM (none / 0)

How can one scrub the internet? Even I, no expert, know that you don't have control over others' sites.

We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.

by politicsmatters on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 06:28:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

If it does get that far (2.00 / 1)

and its a big if, Clinton should win Kentucky big (baring a major scandal or something like that). I'm an Obama supporter but its pretty easy to see that states like WV and Kentucky are made for Clinton to perform well in. Even central PA should go heavily for Clinton.

John McCain wants to stay in Iraq for a century.

by jkfp2004 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:03:01 PM EST

Keith number is 22.2 (none / 0)

Don't expect that lead to hold.

by TheSilverMonkey on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:45:48 PM EST

Re: Clinton crushing Obama in Kentucky by 29 point (none / 0)

Great news! SurveyUSA usually right on the money!
and she will do the same in PA & WV.
After PA her momentum will change minds of people in IN and partially even in NC (in NC blacks made their mind regardless what Obama or Hillary will say or do).
This will help her in OR & MT as well, because those two states have closed primaries and not friken caucuses.

Welcome to a Landslide without white Working class, Latinos, Women, Seniors and holding-on sweeties

by engels on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:46:45 PM EST

How ironic!! (none / 0)

Hillary leading Barack by 29 points in KY.

29 points is exactly the number Obama leads Hillary by NATIONALLY among Democrats when asked who would be the stronger candidate in November. (60-31, Gallup)

BTW, which of these polls do you think is going to hold more sway with the superdelegates?

by vermontprog on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:59:31 PM EST

Re: Clinton crushing Obama in Kentucky by 29 point (none / 0)

Too bad there are so few delegates to be had in Kentucky. Clinton could win ALL of the Kentucky delegates and it would still not matter.

by baghdadjoe on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 06:28:16 PM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.